What The World Needs Now — and it is not John Mayer

In their May/June 2007 issue, Foreign Policy asked twenty-one lea­ding thin­kers “what is the one solu­tion that would make the world a bet­ter place”.

21 Solu­tions to Save the World.

The lea­ding thin­kers inc­lude Amy Myers Jaffe — a Wallace S. Wil­son fellow in energy stu­dies at the James A. Baker III Ins­ti­tute for Public Policy and asso­ciate direc­tor of the Rice Uni­ver­sity Energy Pro­gram — who talks about oil depen­dency and sug­gests that in order to remove our depen­dency on oil, oil which is now or will soon be con­tro­lled by nations ins­tead of by large oil com­pa­nies which will limit access to many in the future, she sug­gests we look at elec­tri­city as the medium of the future.

In “Flip the Swtich” She says.….

“There’s no escape from the rea­lity that we will be lar­gely depen­dent on these natio­nal behe­moths for future oil sup­plies. The impli­ca­tions of this res­truc­tu­ring of the oil industry should be soun­ding alarm bells in the capi­tals of major oil-consuming countries.”

Another well res­pec­ted lea­ding thin­ker whose opi­nion they inc­lu­ded — Stephen Lewis, the for­mer U.N. spe­cial envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa — gives his ans­wer in a post The Second Sex he claims that

“It can safely be said that the strug­gle for gen­der equa­lity is the sin­gle most impor­tant strug­gle on the planet”

He hopes that the ini­tia­tive for the UN to create a high level inter­na­tio­nal agency for women gives the best oppor­tu­nity in years in regard to this struggle.

The sug­ges­tion that it “staf­fed by experts on women’s issues, rather than the mot­ley com­pen­dium of gene­ra­lists within many of the exis­ting U.N. agen­cies who now merely pre­tend to drive the gen­der agenda.” is something we can all hope the UN takes into consideration.

All twenty-one are well worth rea­ding but require a subsc­rip­tion for full text.

It is also worth noting that I will keep my subsc­rip­tion des­pite the fact of the twenty-one lea­ding thin­kers.…. they only inc­lu­ded two women.

Way to go Foreign Policy.


Times”
list of this years most influen­tial peo­ple. Look at it and tell me you do not unders­tand why we are in trouble.

Bratt Pitt???

John Mayer?????????/ Love what he does with his fin­gers but seriously folks.

Rachael Ray??????????????????????????????

The rea­son this is pos­ted is because the poll where you vote clo­ses at mid­night and I just hap­pe­ned to read that fact at the
Daily Intelligencer

Share This
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • SphereIt
  • Mixx
  • FriendFeed

22 Comments

  • The Beckham part of that “Inte­lli­gen­cer” posts sticks with me hard.

    I don’t subsc­ribe to FP but believe it or not my little brother does. I’m off to borrow his login.

  • Inte­res­ting. Twenty-one “save the world” essays, and none of them about con­tai­ning (and pre­fe­rably sharply redu­cing) the world’s human popu­la­tion, without which all the bab­ble over the others is vanity and a cha­sing after wind. Guess saving huma­nity is less impor­tant than bols­te­ring the cir­cu­la­tion figu­res of Foreign Policy.

    Still trying to figure out how 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 etc. qua­li­fies Garry Kas­pa­rov to speak about dic­ta­to­rial governance.

    As for “influen­tial peo­ple” lists, see “cir­cu­la­tion figu­res”, supra. Take another bow, Pogo.

  • Foreign Policy. I’m just not there. I love it that you are the only female I know per­so­nally who has some sort of fas­ci­na­tion with it. I know quite a few fema­les into inter­na­tio­nal finance but not inter­na­tio­nal affairs. I’ll check them out during my week full of “rea­ding days” — see my com­ment below.
    John is having an orgasm because Beckham is the first pic­ture on that time list. You should go read his post.

    Stephen Col­bert
    Dane Cook??
    God help us.

    No, I think it is pretty cool really.

  • john: An evil dirty girl res­ponse just flic­ked through my head. I will abs­tain for pos­ting it. Go check it out.

    oc: Here is the way I look at it.

    Make the world ( the whole wide world ) a place where women have equal power equal access, equal res­pect and there ya go.…. popu­la­tion control.

    Most women in third world coun­tries who are being given loans in order to start their own busi­nes­ses 1. suc­ceed 2. pay back their loans.

    The third thing they do in almost all cases is ditch the man.… birth control

    dane: yea like your fas­ci­na­tion with robots and — other things we won’t discuss.

    I read it, doesn’t take much to give that boy an orgasm.

    eh.
    There are some exce­llent can­di­da­tes, but how did all that trash get in?

  • “Ditch the man”, huh? Shot down, and I hardly got the chance to say “hello”. ;)

    But you’re abso­lu­tely right, at least as far as I unders­tand the case. Trou­ble is, that unders­tan­ding encom­pas­ses the idea that women’s equa­lity in any society is strongly corre­la­ted with the wealth of that society, cf. 19th cen­tury Ame­rica, where wealth led to inc­rea­sing female eman­ci­pa­tion and a dec­line in the birth (and infant mor­ta­lity) rate. And we all know where the wealth of the world is going these days …

  • two out of twenty-one, that is so foreign policy and par for the course.

    I am not a foreign policy per­son but I chec­ked out a cou­ple of them and would love the full text of “A Smar­ter Super­po­wer”. ;)

    “Time” should never let the peo­ple vote.

  • you for­got San­jaya. Have never watched Ame­ri­can Idol, but even I.…

    One of my best friend’s has wor­ked for the UN for oh god, 30 years.. She’s stuck in a country she would rather not be in – and she’s a remar­ka­ble woman – lea­ding the UN’s gen­der equa­lity rights there

    It’s frus­tra­ting because not only does have to deve­lop model pro­blems that really don’t help every woman, she’s a bit stuck being a “role model” but not where she wants to be

  • Rachel Ray churns my butter.

    For­tu­na­tely, that cow has been put to pasture.

    your body is a won­der­land ooo oo, your body needs some vodka ooo oo. …

  • I’m going to have to read at the rest. I loo­ked at what I could of the posts you lin­ked to. As for the “Time” thing. I just have to wonder.

    Ditching the man seems almost man­da­tory these days among women who gain finan­cial inde­pen­dance. This just enfor­ces that a women and­man should both get together after they are already esta­blished in their own res­pec­tive careers and are not depen­dant on each other.

    Sorry I vee­red a little from the main topic.

  • I recom­mend the cri­mi­na­li­za­tion of piety, inc­lu­ding on mat­ters of social jus­tice. Maybe thirty days in a correc­tio­nal faci­lity for all peo­ple of cons­cience regard­less of whether their devo­tion is to a reli­gious con­fes­sion or a cause. I call Coo­per gets the upper bunk in the cushiest cell. It’s just 30 days. I ain’t mad at ya.

  • O C-from what I’ve read the world popu­la­tion will level out in the year 2050. The pro­blem then beco­mes how does the world work­force keep up if it doesn’t con­ti­nue to grow. Unfor­tu­na­tely for the youn­ger gene­ra­tions, reti­re­ment will come some­time in their 70s.

    The one thing mis­sing in the FP article was China (I was glad to see Rus­sia). Some­time bet­ween 2030 and 2040 China will sur­pass the US as the world super­po­wer, then the world will have to deal with Chi­nese Excep­tio­na­lism ins­tead of Ame­ri­can Excep­tio­na­lism (neoconservativism).

    The inte­res­ting thing here is what libe­rals are sug­ges­ting is to empo­wer the UN as much as pos­si­ble now before China beco­mes the glo­bal hegemon.

    The pro­blem is that China is even less inte­res­ted in world opi­nion than the US (did I men­tion Sudan?). The UN will never be able to con­tain China. The Chi­nese eco­nomy will be too impor­tant to almost every cor­ner of the pla­net to the point no country or bloc of coun­tries will be able to make a move without it. It has well over $1Trillion in reser­ves. If it wants to it can flood any mar­ket with any currency it wants to des­troy any eco­nomy it wants. Although the US pre­tends to be the glo­bal hege­mon at the moment, it does so only as per­mit­ted by China. A cou­ple months ago, China was the one country that orga­ni­zed a sum­mit of Oil Con­su­ming coun­tries to see what can be done. This was sig­ni­fi­cant because it shows that China is slowly but surely taking over the US as the world lea­der and pro­vi­ding world lea­dership. Also, look at the six-party talks. Although the North Koreans wan­ted to deal directly with the US, China was the party that was in charge of the talks and is now exe­cu­ting the details of the talks.

    By 2050 the world will sing to Beijing’s tune and the US, UN & EU won’t be able to do a thing about it.

    C-sorry for the long post, but I got my jui­ces flo­wing. I may have to be back to swipe it for my own blog.

  • OC: No shoot down.

    Yes we do know where it’s going and it is not here at least not to the majority.

    kait: Of course they shouldn’t as recent his­tory show “the peo­ple” to be a little simple.

    pia: The pro­blem is the UN needs to esta­blish this body with women who have a lar­ger base of know­ledge outside the realm if the Uni­ted Nation itself. Women from the par­ti­cu­lar coun­tries who have wor­ked in those coun­tries inde­pen­dent of any type of govern­men­tal or inter­na­tio­nally sanc­tio­ned body. It won’t work if left to the UN that the UN has become.

    saur­kraut: I am reas­sig­ning you the name sk because I am lazy.
    Oh so she’s a but­ter chur­ner, I wasn’t sure.
    Yes my body is a won­der­land but you weren’t sup­po­sed to tell anyone. I get enough fan mail as it is. ;)

    jacob: I think your safe, your wife and you married after you esta­blished your own identities.

    Yes I like to keep things rigid and on task around here.

    Doug: I don’t have time for incar­ce­ra­tion Doug I am very busy. I’ll pious-less for a cou­ple hours.

    Danny: As the lifes­pan inc­rea­ses so does the work life span.
    Tech­no­logy as it is and will be will demand
    a les­ser labor force.

    If there must be a super power there will be one. If it be China than it is because we allo­wed it while we were cove­ting foreign oil and star­ting base­less wars. I am much less fami­liar with China or policy in regard to China than I am with even Iran or Rus­sia for that mat­ter. I can barely wrap my head around anything this week as it is.

    No doubt China is an eco­no­mic behe­moth get­ting ready to sit on our face.

  • What’s wrong with John Mayer?

    It’s out of my hands. I just want to live my life, do a what I can — which won’t be much.

    I could see mana­ging a cam­paign, I’d be good at that.

    I barely unders­tand the sloth our social policy here has tur­ned into. I read today that the men­tally ill in this country are dying in record num­bers due to the policy chan­ges in invol­ving the care there-of, chan­ges star­ted in the Rea­gan era.
    We are killing them and will end up killing our­sel­ves. We are no lon­ger the peo­ple who will save the world.

    Sta­ying up till five in the mor­ning, living in the library, really puts me in a bad mood.
    Sorry it was not quite on topic/task here.

  • Rachel Ray will never be influen­tial. She doesn’t even call her­self a chef. She calls her­self a “coo­ker”. I don’t know about you, but I don’t ever want a coo­ker to be influential.

  • The eco­no­mic lean of all of these makes me glad one of my degrees will be in econ.

    My view on the Time thing.

    I just loo­ked at it and I can only say in asto­nish­ment, Rain??????

    We know not what we do.

    On second thought.

    He is pretty awesome.

  • When ever­yone has ade­quate food and shel­ter, and clean water, the other pro­blems are all easier to redress. Mini­mal living stan­dards reduce vio­lence, ine­quity, disease, etc.

    It’s always been the best ans­wer. Pro­blem is that it’s the har­dest one to get to.

    As for Garry Kas­pa­rov, I didn’t see anyone ans­wer the ques­tion… Kas­pa­rov is now an oppo­si­tio­nal party lea­der in Rus­sia lea­ding rallies against the recen­tra­li­za­tion of power in the Rus­sian govern­ment. He’s basi­cally for­sa­ken his chess back­ground in order to take an active role in making sure democ­ra­tic reforms aren’t rolled back. He’s, obviously, per­so­nally very popu­lar and has a lot of pull on that par­ti­cu­lar issue.

  • Come on, Coo­per. You’re young. Nothing but time.

  • Um…Sanjaya? And as far as Rachel Ray is con­cer­ned, she’s just teaching the 20 somethings how to cook b/c their mothers were busy brin­ging home the bacon, and spin­ning pla­tes to teach their kids how. Now, the mar­ke­ters are in line to publi­cize Ray, because of who watches her. Or something like that. But San­jaya? Hell, I don’t know half the peo­ple on the list. Time needs to qua­lify “influen­tial.” Influen­tial in what capa­city? Exhi­bit lemminghoodness?

  • Saw that list in FP earlier.

    The pro­blem with these sorts of “Save the World” lists is, well, they’re often based too much in aca­de­mic thought, with very few actual, prac­ti­cal solu­tions — in many ways, just high-brow ver­sions of the same back-patting, circle-the-wagons, “let’s make a list to sell issues” stuff found in things like TIME’s list.

    Good food for thought, though. Really good essay on the pro­blem with bio­fuels and its cost to the world’s poor in the latest issue of Foreign Affairs, too.

  • G: Nothing wrong with him but come on.

    Be well G. The men­tally ill thing is not sur­pri­sing. We are going backward.

    mojo:Certainly , which is why it’s such a joke.

    casey: Sure we know, it’s easier that way.

    dan: until we can era­di­cate it we are nothing. But even in this country the poor now are likely to stay poor and the rich will stay rich. The Ame­ri­can Dreams dead. Which begs the ques­tion of not here where?

    Doug: So I hear.

    Kelly­pea: Influen­tial only so that time can have something to write that idiots will read. That is my take on it.

    Jason: to be fair the article was about ideas not action. But there-in lies the pro­blem so little action. I have great res­pect for seve­ral peo­ple on that list. There are some very via­ble pro­grams which have used ideas from a few of those indi­vi­duals, pro­grams which are are alle­via­ting poverty. Way too few to be sure but still. Without the ideas there is no action at all.

  • […] I’m gra­te­ful to Coo­per at Won­der­land or Not for brin­ging this article to my […]

  • I’m going to catch up on it. I hap­pen to like that jour­nal and think it’s a pretty sound read usually.

    There is much about aca­de­mic speak which is use­ful for those that are taking action. You do have a point there.
    I’m an envi­ron­men­tal geo­lo­gist and tra­vel a good part of my waking days.

    Pota­ble water– a large issue which should have and could have been sol­ved by now.